Topic: The Nintendo Switch Rumor and Speculation Thread

@BobLongRickTangle
Look at the rest of my post. Nintendo are a company, fundamentally they don't care whether you're buying games on one platform or another as long as you're buying their games. Obviously they'd prefer people buy their higher margin, more premium products. Definitely they'd like people to upgrade to platforms that are going to have a longer shelf life. But fundamentally they don't care where you're buying their games as long as you're buying them

Which is why you've got this all backwards. Nintendo's main focus isn't and shouldn't be converting existing Switch owners onto Switch 2. Nintendo's main focus is and should be making their platforms more compelling when compared to their competitors. And a Switch that's more powerful? It's a more compelling product. If that more compelling product also gets people upgrading to the new platform? Bonus. But that's not the main goal

Your original question:
Do you have any evidence to support your claim here that Nintendo's next console only needs to offer a boost in performance and nothing more?

The Switch as it is is compelling. It's a great product. But its greatest weakness against its competitors is its lack of power. A more capable version of the Switch closes that gap. A more capable version of the Switch means that people already invested in the Switch are more likely to upgrade to the Switch 2 than to move on to PC, PS5, Steam Deck. A more capable version of the Switch existing on the market means that someone interested in buying into a platform is more likely to pick Nintendo than they otherwise would have

It doesn't need more than just being more powerful. The Switch is doing well, a more powerful version of it existing will be more compelling. It's self evident. Logic and common sense is my evidence

Also...

I have NO idea how you leaped to that conclusion from your selective quoting of my previous post. To be fair, I certainly have some views along these lines. I do think that some, not all, titles will continue to release on Switch with compatibility for Switch 2 well into the future. Because, to be blunt, the next version of Rhythm Heaven doesn't need DLSS, HDR and all of the little bits and pieces that I'm sure @Fullstack will gladly outline for you. But there are ~140mill Switch consoles out there

This won't be the hard transition of software that we saw from Wii U to Switch. It will be, for lack of a better comparison, probably most like the GB/GBC in that sense. The GB had class A, class B and class C games. GB, GBC enhanced, GBC only. It seems possible for that to come back and I've been a prominent pusher of that idea on these forums for years. It's just an efficient way to do things

But no, the goal there isn't about people never transitioning. The goal isn't to support the Switch indefinitely or to be held back by the capabilities of the Switch. The goal there would be to allow the new hardware to be able to leverage the large Switch library and allow less demanding games to leverage the large Switch install base

I would believe that Nintendo R&D was essentially looking at a refinement of what they did with the Switch. Two reasons for that: most people would say that the Switch was successful because of its hybrid functionality. So doubling down on what’s already there makes sense. The other reason is similar to Breath of the Wild, and that is, it’s hard to immediately top a very well received bit of entertainment, or tech product in this case. So the game after BotW was just more of what BotW brought. That gives people’s very high expectations time to relax and accept something different in time. It’s how Nintendo should handle the success of the Switch.

Very likely they’ve got something secondary to the hardware that they can talk about. Nintendo likes to talk about something that wasn’t a feature of their past hardware or anyone’s past hardware. It gives them a springboard for their communication. Sometimes those features are major and sometimes more minor, but either way they break the ice with something that’s different, so that can be counted on too, I would say.

Well, it took Sony what, three years to stop cross-gen releases? The PS4 was so successful that they couldn't just leave it behind, first-party software wise (last one was Everybody's Golf 2 back in January 2023). The Switch is going to sell more consoles in it's eighth year than the Wii U did in its entire lifecycle. So yeah, there's little doubt the Switch will continue to receive first party games two or three years into the Switch 2's life.

I think it could very well be the case that Switch 2 ends up having a shorter lifecycle than Switch 1. Nintendo might be lining up its next shot after Switch/Switch 2 quicker than we might think. I just have a feeling about that.

@skywake I did read the rest of your post, but to be honest it was 95% meaningless fluff that distracted from your handwaving comments that Nintendo doesn't need to cater towards it's biggest audience. And that's why I focused on it in my response.

All of your arguments for why a more powerful Switch is a compelling offering apply only to the Nintendo core audience (the kind of people who would buy a fridge if it had a Nintendo logo on it and played Super Mario Bros). The family audience doesn't care, the kid audience doesn't care, and the core gaming audience already have a range of devices that cater to the same needs that the Switch provides whilst also being more powerful - with more seemingly on the way.

All the while the Nintendo core audience is the smallest of section of the entire Switch audience.

When was the last time Nintendo catered to this audience? When they released hardware powerful enough to keep up with the rest of the industry? When they released Mother 3 outside of Japan or a new F-Zero game? When they made it easy for you to use their online services with voice chat? Nintendo doesn't have to care about this audience as it is literally the one that brings in the least money for them, they just dangle a couple of carrots (MP4, the possibility of WW/TP ports) for an entire generation and that's enough for most of this audience to pull the trigger. Meanwhile Nintendo is using the power of convenience combined with nostalgia to bring in a whole new audience that has propelled them to greater profits than all of their other generations combined. But sure; it's me that has this all backwards.

@BobLongRickTangle
I never said that Nintendo doesn't need to cater towards their biggest audience. I never said anything about the audience they need to target. All I said was that Nintendo's primary goal isn't to convince people who have a Switch to get up and upgrade to the Switch 2. Their goal is to convince people to buy into their platform and remain on their platform as opposed to spending their money on other platforms

They've generally done a pretty good job of that over the last several years with the Switch. But they're starting to look a bit shakey and, however much you want to try and convince yourself otherwise, their biggest weakness is their lack of horsepower. A weakness that only grows larger over time. A weakness that becomes cheaper and cheaper to correct for by the day. A more powerful piece of hardware is inevitable, it'll happen. And it stands to reason that a more powerful version of even literally same thing would do nothing but strengthen their position

So no, I disagree. Nintendo doesn't need to do something crazy or off the wall here. They could do something like that but they don't need it. I think the Switch doing as well as it has is proof enough that Nintendo has found a compelling concept. One that remains compelling. They don't need to add anything else to that, Switch 2 can be "just" more powerful. And that's enough for it to do well. Simple as that

@Magician so if we suppose that Nintendo releases software on both it's current and last gen hardware for ~3 years, where's the impetus for current Switch users to upgrade to the next gen hardware if it's the same but more powerful?

Like I mentioned in my post above the large majority of the current Switch audience won't be led by a modest bump in power alone, they need something compelling that the current Switch doesn't offer, otherwise there's no real benefit in migrating from the existing product.

@BobLongRickTangle
Again, read my posts. Nintendo's primary goal isn't to convince people who have a Switch to get up and upgrade to the Switch 2. Their goal is to convince people to buy into their platform and remain on their platform as opposed to spending their money on other platforms

@skywake this isn't how business works. If users don't migrate to the latest products eventually they forget about the outdated ones they do own - as you mentioned they're already starting to look shakey on this front.

And I'm not suggesting that the new console won't be more powerful - of course it will. My point is that a bump in power alone is only going to appeal to a small portion of their overall audience. Meaning that this approach wouldn't move the needle in terms of what matters to any business: profit and growth over anything else.

Furthermore, if Nintendo truly wanted to create a two-tier platform with one appealing to "hardcore" fans and another appealing to everyone else, then a "Pro" version of Switch would be a much less risky proposition, whereas a new platform necessitates software specifically designed for that platform, that doesn't run on last gen hardware, as well as starting the audience again from zero.

@Magician Not quite, the last 1st party support on PS4 was the free God of War Ragnarok expansion (Valhalla) in December 2023. If you're to count VC releases (that's essentially what the PS4/PS5 version of Everybody's Golf 2 is), it's only fair to also count expansions.

If you want to count MLB The Show then it's MLB The Show 24 in March 2024 though MLB dictates which platforms the game comes to despite being made by Sony so it's very different from everything else.

In any case, Sony's approach with PS4 support post-PS5 launch was a result of the pandemic. Massive PS5 stock issues resulted in Sony backtracking on "we believe in generations" because there wasn't enough PS5 consoles out in the wild. In an alternate reality where the pandemic didn't happen in 2020, crossgen releases would've no doubt mostly been PS5 only (Horizon Forbidden West, Gran Turismo 7, God of War Ragnarok). Sackboy definitely would've been crossgen considering LBP3 was crossgen PS3/PS4, not sure about Miles Morales.

@Magician @BobLongRickTangle @Grumblevolcano @skywake I think it's reasonable to expect a new 3D Mario, a new Mario Kart, a new Animal Crossing etc to be released within the first year or so of the Switch 2 - there is no way any of those titles get released on Switch 1.

If they do a HD port of Luigi's Mansion 1, could that come to Switch 1 and 2? there's a good chance, but there is no way any top tier titles are coming to Switch 1.

Wasn't part of the reason Sony did multi platform for so long due to production issues of the PS5 stemming from covid?

@skywake yeah and one I already addressed. Nintendo's primary goal, like all businesses, is growth.

Your suggestion that they don't need to convince people to migrate to their new platform is an assumption. A flawed assumption that you appear to be basing on an iPhone-like model. However while Apple releases new iPhone models every 2 years the Switch has been in the wild for 7 years and counting. The option for users some users to stick to the older models while continuing to purchase games doesn't apply here as the software won't cross over 1-for-1 like phones do, and the technology gap between 2 years vs. 8 years is just too big.

Nintendo could have taken this route by providing semi-regular model updates with modest bumps in power each time, but they clearly decided against it.

No straw man, you suggested that Nintendo doesn't care if people migrate from Switch to the successor or not, as long as they are buying games. I asked you how Nintendo would achieve this unless games were simultaneously releasing games for both platforms.

Perhaps you were suggesting that Nintendo would continue to develop separate games for both platforms then? Going back to a situation they have spent years trying to get away from.

You mentioned at some point that the main audience for Nintendo is families with children. The thing about children, especially of a certain age group, is that they change every few years. So it is not always about upgrading for that major audience, it is about having something that appeals to families looking for a new console e.g. 3 years from now. Switch is already designed to work well for children, already has a price point below major competing consoles, has much more brand trust than their closest form-wise competitor Steam Deck, continues to have family oriented award-winning games . If I was a parent looking for a new console for my 6 year old, I wouldn't care if there was a gimmick which didn't previously exist, I would just look for good and trusted family games in an affordable device which works well for children. Switch has all of these and Switch 2 surely will also. I might also look for:

• Is there any bad marketing/ reasons to avoid. For example reviews about new popular games running terribly. Switch has this increasingly (e.g. another Crab's Treasure) but Switch 2 presumably won't have this issue as much.
• If I want to occasionally steal my child's Switch or if an older sibling wants to share it, can Switch run some varied games for older people like e.g. CoD or other major third party games. Again, Switch 2 will be better in this regard than current Switch.

A new crazy gimmick might convince a few people to rush out and get a new device, but it's hard to imagine one so innovative that it really affects the main audience's decision.

In terms of actively upgrading rather than being a new device? That lies mostly on the games and Nintendo will have to make compelling Switch-2 exclusives. Again, their ability to do that is fairly independent of any gimmicks.

Don't get me wrong, I do think Nintendo will likely add a new gimmick (more AR anyone? Or new weird peripherals?), but I don't actually think it will be the main selling point or be fundamental to all that many games.

Ding ding ding!

Edit: another thought to add. I said earlier the main game in town is maintaining an appealing product and reducing friction. It's worth noting that abruptly stopping support for a previous console is a pretty high friction act.

They don't want to force a transition from Switch before the Switch 2 becomes appealing enough for people to jump. Because they might jump to PS5, or PC.... or even nothing at all. It's a risk. But if that transition is smooth? You're more likely to hold onto them for longer

There was an iPhone analogy earlier but consider this possibility. Imagine if every new iPhone had a new app store. Or even every 5th iPhone. And when the new iPhone dropped they just stopped approving apps. How many more people would still be on iPhone? There would be riots

If Nintendo can nail backwards compatibility including moderate enhancements for legacy titles on Switch 2? If they can do that and continue to push out some stuff that still can run on Switch for a couple of years? They will have successfully smoothed out the transition, and they'll be better off for it